Nancy Pelosi Just Days From COMPLETE Defeat After Dems Suddenly Blindside Her

Nancy Pelosi Just Days From COMPLETE Defeat After Dems Suddenly Blindside Her

It is far from certain or a done deal that Nancy Pelosi will be the next Speaker of the House. 17 Democrats so far have come forward declaring they will not support Pelosi in the role. In fact, at least one Democrat told Fox News that this was going to get ugly. That is a certainty.

This is why Pelosi is groveling before the Rev. Al Sharpton. She wants the support of the Congressional Black Caucus among others. She may be a fund-raising juggernaut, but the 78-year-old Democrat appears frail and slurs her speech regularly. Many Democrats believe it is time to hand the reins over to younger leadership. Fox News has more on this brewing, bitter fight within the Democratic Party:

The revolt inside the Democratic Party against Nancy Pelosi’s return to the House speakership is gaining momentum with a growing number of Democrats signing a letter pledging not to support the California Democrat for speaker.

“It’s going to get ugly,” a senior House Democrat told Fox News.

Fox News has confirmed at least 17 House Democrats, including incumbents and incoming members, have signed on to a document saying they will not support Pelosi on the House floor for speaker. A Democrat familiar with the effort says they are trying to add more names before the letter is publicly released.

If all those Democrats vote against Pelosi on the floor, Pelosi would not have the votes for speaker. To get the gavel, Pelosi will first need to pick up a majority of the Democratic Caucus in internal leadership elections, then go on to win an absolute majority of the House.

“It’s who blinks first,” another senior House Democratic lawmaker said. “Is it Nancy or is it the caucus?”

Still, even as these Democrats try to convince Pelosi she doesn’t have enough support to win, no Democrat has stepped forward yet to challenge her.

But on Wednesday, Rep. Marcia Fudge, a Democrat from Ohio, said she is contemplating running for speaker.

“People are asking me to do it, and I am thinking about it,” Fudge told a local news outlet. “I need to give it some thought and see if I have an interest. I am at the very beginning of this process. It is just in discussion at this point.”

During a Capitol Hill press conference on Thursday, Pelosi simply replied “yes” when asked if she would have the votes if the election were today. Asked about a potential challenge from Fudge, Pelosi replied, “Come on in. The water’s warm.”

“Congress needs a new leader. Period,” Moulton said. “I’m hoping Marcia Fudge, my first (and arguably best) mentor in Congress, will run for the next Speaker of the House. I have full faith in her ability to lead our new Congress to its fullest potential.”

Congress needs a new leader. Period.

I’m hoping Marcia Fudge, my first (and arguably best) mentor in Congress will run for the next Speaker of the House. I have full faith in her ability to lead our new Congress to its fullest potential.

Fox News is told the 17 Democrats who have signed the letter include Fudge, Moulton, and Reps. Tim Ryan of Ohio, Kathleen Rice of New York, Ed Perlmutter of Colorado, Kurt Schrader of Oregon, Filemon Vela Jr. of Texas, Bill Foster of Illinois, Brian Higgins of New York, Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts, Linda Sanchez of California, Jim Cooper of Tennessee, Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, Max Rose of New York, Anthony Brindisi of New York and Ben McAdams of Utah.

In recent days, allies of Pelosi have been working to stop a Democratic rebellion from taking place.

In a Monday letter to fellow Democrats, Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings pressured Democrats to vote for Pelosi, saying, “I understand that some of our newly-elected members said during their campaigns they would oppose Leader Pelosi.”

Cummings said Democrats must unify behind the party’s choice.

“After we, as Democrats, make our selection, our new members should not be pressured into voting against our party’s nominee on the House floor in January — when the choice will be between the Democratic candidate and the Republican candidate,” Cummings wrote. “That will only play into the hands of House Republicans and President Trump.”

Democrats plan to meet behind closed doors to select their nominee for speaker later this month. But the official election for speaker takes place in January when the entire House of Representatives votes.

After arriving in Washington on Tuesday, several Democrats suggested it will be hard for them to support Pelosi for speaker.

Rep.-elect Kendra Horn, D-Okla., who unexpectedly defeated GOP Rep. Steve Russell in a seat which had been Republican for years, told Fox News she will vote for “what’s best for Oklahoma” and said supporting Pelosi would be “challenging” in her state.

Reps.-elect Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., and Joe Neguse, D-Colo., indicated they are undecided regarding who they will support.

Politico reported that Pelosi and her allies are arguing that it’s important for a woman to be elected speaker.

“I think it would look ridiculous if we win back the House … we have a pink wave with women who have brought back the House, then you’re going to not elect the leader who led the way? No,” Florida Rep. Lois Frankel told Politico. “That would be wrong.”

Republicans, certainly, see a Pelosi speakership as beneficial to them. President Trump last week said that Republicans would help Pelosi if she didn’t have enough support from Democrats. It is unclear whether the president was being sincere.

“If they give her a hard time, perhaps we will add some Republican votes. She has earned this great honor!” he tweeted.

Pelosi was speaker between 2007-11, but in 2016 she fended off a leadership challenge from Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio. During a recent appearance on Fox News’ “Cavuto,” Ryan said, “I don’t think this is a done deal yet” in terms of Pelosi becoming speaker again. Ryan also says he “hopes somebody does” challenge Pelosi.

“We’re getting a lot of phone calls and a lot of us are talking, I think it’s important,” he said. “As I said, I don’t have any intention of doing this at this point.”

President Trump Announced How He Just Got Mexico To Pay For The Wall

When President Trump said he would have Mexico pay for the wall on our southern border, he meant it. He just announced how they are going to do it too… through the USMCA (the revision of NAFTA). Which I suspect was the plan all along.

Very early this morning at about 4:38 am, Trump tweeted: “I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!”

Do you think Facebook should be regulated so they're forced to treat everyone the same, regardless of their political beliefs, considering their size and influence in society?

For those doubters on Twitter (and you will see some of them below), I highly doubt the plan was ever to have Mexico pay for the wall up front. We would fund the wall and recoup the funding from Mexico. I don’t see what is so hard to understand about that. But it seems to be a financial move many can’t seem to grasp and that is beyond their comprehension.

I fully support that if Congress just won’t fund the wall, having the military build it through Pentagon funding and then reimbursing them for it. Why? Because it is a national security issue and always has been. That border is a clear and present danger.

Why shouldn’t Trump have Mexico pay through the USMCA? And why all the negativity from people who are obviously poorly informed and just politically biased? They let their hate for the president dictate all their thoughts and actions rather than looking at the mechanics of the move and the benefits from it. I just don’t get these people. They have not even given this a chance and already they are shooting it down. That’s a leftist for you.

I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!

I am losing faith in you, sir. Why are you asking us taxpayers for 5 billion dollars if the new deal will pay for the wall? You promised that we wouldn’t have to pay for it! Please keep your promise, a free border wall, or I will not vote for you again. #NoWallNoVotepic.twitter.com/eDopbpl7T1

Also the deal still has to be ratified and approved by Congress which probably won't happen until the end of 2019 Or possibly mid 2020. So you're making promises using money you don't have and may possibly not get. What a shocker Mr. Bankruptcy

Great so you don't need a penny from Congress or US Taxpayers then. Let us know when Mexico sends you the check for the $5 billion you want for the first payment on the wall. Until then don't bother Americans for the $.

Most of these people don’t seem to get that a great deal of the funding for the wall was approved before Trump started all of this. I have never seen so many people so intent on leaving themselves open to attack. What a bunch of foolish, self-involved individuals. Just sad. Build the wall whatever it takes and do it fast before one of our many enemies gets a chance to severely cripple this nation once again.

Three Clinton Foundation Whistleblowers Will Testify This Coming Week, “Explosive” Allegations to Come…

“With regard to the investigation, which doesn’t get a lot of attention, into the Clinton foundation, the DOJ designated John Huber to look into this. They have 6,000 pages of evidence that they’ve gone through. The foundation raised $2.5 billion, and they’re looking into potential improprieties. What’s next on this investigation?” the Fox News host questioned Congressman Meadows.

“Well, I think for the American people, they want to bring some closure, not just a few sound bites, here or there, so we’re going to be having a hearing this week, not only covering over some of those 6,000 pages that you’re talking about, but hearing directly from three whistleblowers that have actually spent the majority of the last two years investigating this,” Meadows answered.

Some of the allegations they make are quite explosive, Martha and as we just look at the contributions — now everybody’s focused on the contributions for the Clinton Foundation and what has happened just in the last year, but if you look at it, you know, it had a very strong rise, the minute she was selected as Secretary of State — then it dipped down when she was no longer there and then rose again, when she decided to run for president. So there’s all kinds of allegations of you know, pay-to-play and that kind of thing, “Meadows said.

Take a look:

In the three years following Hillary Clinton’s departure from her position in the State Department, the Clinton Foundation donations dropped by 90%.

The Gateway Pundit writes, “Hillary Clinton left the State Department in 2013 and it looks like nobody wants to pay since she can no longer play.”

Currently, the Clinton Foundation is being put under investigation by the Justice Department and the FBI for a whole plethora of reasons.

The Hill reports that the Clinton Foundation is also being investigated by the IRS in order to find out whether or not any “tax-exempt assets were converted for personal or political use.”

Numerous Clinton emails backing up the idea that the Clinton Foundation was involved in “pay-to-play” schemes during Clinton’s time serving as the head of the Department of State have been found by Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.